Audience Interpretation of Ethnicity and Race in Media - Essay Example

Audience Interpretation of Ethnicity and Race in Media Introduction The concept of race and ethnicity in the interpretation of media texts is one that causes the audience to alter their perspective of different cultures and concepts being portrayed in different films as well as outside of films. Specifically, it can be noted that the visualization of ethnicity, as well as the concept of characteristics that are defined through racial differences, is one that causes those within media and those outside of media to have different angles and interpretations of culture. Defining what makes a difference in the media text and how this alters the perspective through race and ethnicity is one that also redefines interpretations of social, political, cultural and individualized ideas. Not only does this alter perspectives within media itself, but becomes a reflection of boundaries within a given culture and sets of social groups. Agenda of the Media The concept of race and media is one that is not only defined through the pictures that are created and perceived with audiences. In relation to this, are producers and media companies that are behind the scenes that contribute to the way in which ethnicity and race is perceived. It is from the concepts that are created behind the media scenes that make a difference in what is approached and how race and ethnicity are defined. However, more than the stories that are created in the beginning, are specific agendas in which different media industries are creating to cause a specific racial or ethnic perception to be conceived to a specific audience. This is based on the defining and re-defining of what race and ethnicity means and how it affects how the audience perceives the specific ideals. With the agenda that is used to create media scenes, is a basis of defining what will sell to specific audiences. The concept of commercialization and industrialization for any piece of media is the main component that carries through different media groups. This is because it allows the media to continue to produce and raise money for further projects, and draws more audiences towards the popularity of the media. Because of this, the agenda behind the media is to create and produce ethnic and racial concepts that are accepted by the culture at large and that can help to define and re-define sets of popularity that will draw audiences towards more viewing. With this as the main component, are mis-interpretations that will be presented to continue to draw viewers towards the audience and to allow them to see ethnic and racial concepts in a way that raises popularity. The agenda that has been created is one that is reinforced through the creation of boundaries through ethnicity. Most film makers who are a part of the value and perception of ethnicity will include ethnic characters in specific roles so there is a specific perception that can not be missed with the viewers. This automatically creates and defines a bias as well as a boundary of the specific race, and also creates specific perceptions to be carried within cultures. The cultural exchange that occurs because of this is one that results in ideals of how specific ethnicities act and speak, with weight on social concepts that are carried both within the media and outside of the agenda that is created (Alasuutari Pertti, 1999). The agenda that is being displayed to cause boundaries within ethnicity can clearly be defined as a perception that is given to the audience and adds into bias and actions within a culture. This occurs through the concept of transmitting specific communications that occur from the screen and into the social ideals of individuals. According to theorist, Hartley, this separates individuals into a 'them' and 'us' role. This is where the 'us' is transmitting a message and the 'them' or audience, receives the message. When this is communicated, it becomes a part of what is known as mediated culture. Within this, is the 'us' role that defines things through commercialization, and the 'them' role that defines ideals through accepted social practices. Through this, the boundaries and conditions can be changed as a fluid ideal that reflects in social and cultural life outside of the media. This particular ideal becomes problematic because 'subjects' that are defined as racial or ethnic in some respect become linked to a single medium and genre, and can not move outside of the stereotypes that are reflected in the media and in social areas of life (Bird, Elizabe, 2003). Along with the stereotypes that narrow the boundaries within social and cultural perspective, are agendas that clearly show a set of undefined ideals within cultures. This is one of the problematic areas that is clearly a part of the script and agenda carried by most media companies. Specifically, the problem arises between creating one specific ideal that is too close to a reality. Within this main concept; however, is the inability for a clear perspective on a well rounded life of different cultures. The problem is further problematic as not representing a realistic view, but still transmitting the view as a social or cultural ideal. This causes the ideal to become a part of social and cultural perspective as a bias, without a true vision of what is occurring. For instance, Native Americans may be represented in films as being poor, alcoholic and 'living on the rez.' Most films are defined as this, and don't allow for this stereotype to be overcome on any other level. The problem arises when there are Native Americans that are successful, work as doctors, go to school or work outside of the rez. One example of this is through “Northern Exposure,” which was not widely accepted because it represented Native Americans as being intelligent and successful. The result was to present Native Americans in a different light to draw audiences into the stereotype and to continue viewing to be at a high level. Because the stereotypes are accepted when they are transmitted through films, the stereotype in social and cultural life continues to be resonant, as well as problematic for the cultures and social areas experiencing the boundaries. The ability to decipher between realities between the media and social realities, when there is not familiarity with the realistic picture becomes the main problem. The agenda behind this includes a boundary that is created within lifestyle and culture (Bird, Elizabe, 2003). How the Media Reacts Towards Culture Within this main ideal, are several branches that show there are different perspectives that link to the agendas that are a part of the media text. One theory that draws on this perspective is known as a stimulus-response model that is linked to media studies. What this is defined as is a set of media that defines specific behaviours as overtones within one sector of life. For instance, blacks being represented as a violent culture as a part of the behaviour without having a full perspective of the lifestyle is a behavioural overtone within the media. This specific ideal then turns into an ideological role in which ethnic and racial individuals always carry within the media. This is because the audiences have triggered this into a main ideal and expect to see the boundary and stereotype as a realistic viewpoint from the one representation. This ideological role continues to move into media, until it becomes a socially accepted boundary among different ethnicities. The problem with representing these main stereotypes, according to the stimulus-response model, is that there is a continuous response from the social and cultural ideas that are linked to the viewpoints presented. “The media [becomes] a major cultural and ideological force, standing in a dominant position with respect to the way in which social relations and political problems were defined and the production and transformation of popular ideologies in the audiences addressed” (Hall, 1980). Through the transformation into the audience, are messages that are known to bring a greater bearing in a social context and with cultural relations among individuals, which is linked to the behavioural response that becomes a barrier in society. Specifically, this becomes a mass communication that, if not challenged through contextual analysis and ideology, becomes an accepted viewpoint in the mass amount of people that relate to the media in some alternative form. The ideology that is linked to the audience is one that has not only moved into boundaries and stereotypes, but is also defined as how different types of audiences respond to ethnic and racial concepts within media text. In defining audience, it is stated that this is a response to the dominant group of individuals who take the representations and ideologies and use it as a transmitter to communicate specific ideals about race and ethnicity. Specifically, it is shown that the coded text reaches the audience and becomes decoded, with the audience accepting the specific bias as a perceivable ideology. In this context, it is not only the agenda of the film makers and those who are putting in the context of the film, but is also linked to the analysis of the audience and how they respond to the ideologies presented at a mass level. This becomes the behavioural reaction that is linked to the stimulus of the media, as defined in this model, which means there is a form of accepted communication among those who are taking in the media ideologies (Hall, Stuart, 1980). The question then becomes not only one of the agendas being set by film makers and media text to portray ethnic and cultural interpretations, but also how this caters to audiences in the message that is sent. If the media is determining the ideologies that is given to the audience, than this means that no perception and contextual analysis is able to be perceived within the audience that is watching the film, but is instead only given to the audience as an accepted means. In a different perspective, it is not the stimulus that causes behaviours, but instead, is the audience that dictates the agenda that is set by the media. This allows the media to cater to the audience, consciousness and what is accepted within the culture. It is this that causes some of the boundaries to be set and some of the perceptions to be delivered through the media. If there are specific social patterns that are seen by the media, than this can easily be reflected through the perspectives in the media. Both become a mirror of the other, allowing for specific perspectives to be accepted. Specifically, this is a relationship to social situations and perspectives that the audience can relate to and which comes through with the agenda that is set in the different media text (Moores, Shaun, 1994). The Concept of Cultural Power With this concept, is the ideal that the images that are portrayed allow for individuals to live through the images within their own perception. The ethnic and racial individuals that are portrayed become objects that are perceived and accepted as a social norm available. In some instances, this is used under the agenda of creating commercialization and a mass appeal to the public, along with communication that may seem acceptable to individuals. However, when this is conveyed and accepted through audiences analysis, it becomes another type of accepted reality that is within the social norms. “Taken together they appear to imply that in certain circumstances segments of the population are able to appropriate such industrial objects and utilize them in their creation of their own image. In other cases, people are forced to live in and through objects which are created through the images held of them by a different and dominant section of the population” (Morley, Dave, 1992). What this implies is that there are more than the film makers and media, as well as a main audience that is involved in the objectification of race and ethnicity within a culture. More than this, there is an audience that perceives the objects of ethnic and racial ideals. The second audience is the one that is the ethnic and racial ideal and becomes the individuals that are marginalized and on the edge of the culture because of the perceptions that are accepted by the culture. The theory that becomes a part of the audience is a perception of those who are objectified and those who accept this as a part of the social norm. When this happens through the perceptions of the media, it becomes not only a boundary and marginalization, but also falls into the category of being a social – class division. This causes a cultural boundary from the media that is created through the mis-perceptions and bias given throughout the films. Within this, as stated by theorists such as Miller, is what is known as consumption practices. This relationship begins with the media setting a specific agenda and the two types of audiences consuming and accepting this agenda. As this occurs, more of the agenda is able to be pushed, as audiences begin to accept and act it out as a social norm. When this occurs, the media can cater to those individuals that are acting in accordance to the ethnic and racial ideals set through stereotypes and perspectives within the media (Morley, Dave, 1992). With this concept in mind, is then an exchange of the media to the audience. This not only becomes a set of perspectives that are reflected in social and cultural circumstances, but becomes an audience demand. This demand is one that gives the culture a certain power within the media to demand the reflections that are a part of the media. For instance, when a violent show is seen on television, it is the culture that is looking at the violence and buying into the media concepts that are given. In the evaluation from the audience, as well as the contextual analysis, is the ideal that this is a realistic approach. The result is that whoever is brought into the ethnic and racial concepts within the violent acts becomes the individual that will always bring this societal behaviour into a reality. The more this is accepted and the more the culture is given this power, the more it becomes a reality. As this occurs, the media is able to continue to push this specific agenda to draw in more viewers and to build on the commercialization of violence through the specific ethnic and racial ideals that have been portrayed. The ideal, then, is not only one of a stimulus and response model, but becomes one of a cultural ideology that is reflected through media relations and back into society as a set of boundaries (Seiter, E, 1991). In the relationship between cultural power and the media, the concept of ethnicity and race becomes not one of reality, but instead, one of consumption. Through the demands that are provided through the television, combined with the agenda of giving a sense of industrialization and objectification of ethnicity, is one that not only provides communication, but also a response outside of the media that portrays a specific reality. The more popular the culture demands these specific ideals, the more they become not only a boundary that sets apart different ethnicities and cultures, but also specific actions that are reflected in the ethnicities and cultures, as well as in the social concepts that are a part of the media. The overall exchange is a reflection of the industrial concepts of media to something that becomes a reality with the behaviours and social relationships among those that are within any community (Tulloch, J. 2000). Conclusion The concept of ethnicity and racial ideals as presented in the media text is one that carries several layers of communication and exchange from the media presentation and to the audience. Not only is this identified as a transmitter to convey specific communication and messages, but also becomes one that reflects in the social norms and cultural acceptance on various levels. This includes objectification and marginalization of specific cultures and ethnicities, as well as mass popularity that accepts these ideals as a part of the communication that is received. The result is that the commercialization of the media and the cultural power becomes a reflection from one to the other, and builds an alternative reality both within the media and outside of the viewings of the media. Bibliography 1. Alasuutari, Pertti. (1999). “Rethinking the Media Audience: The New Agenda.” Sage Publications: London. 2. Bird, Elizabe. (2003). “The Audience in Everyday Life: Living in a Media World.” Routledge: New York. 3. Hall, Stuart. (1980). “Culture, Media, Language: Working Papers in Cultural Studies, 1972-79”. Routledge: London. 4. Moores, Shaun. (1994). “Interpreting Audiences: The Ethnography of Media Consumption.” Sage Publications: London. 5. Morley, Dave. (1992). “Television, Audiences and Cultural Studies.” Routledge: London. 6. Seiter, Ellen. (1991). “Remote Control: Television, Audiences, and Cultural Power.” Routledge: London. 7. Tulloch, J. (2000). “Watching Television Audiences: Cultural Theories and Methods.” Arnold: London. Read More